MyMedR

Displaying all 5 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

Environmental triggers in IBD: a review of progress and evidence

Ananthakrishnan AN, Bernstein CN, Iliopoulos D, Macpherson A, Neurath MF, Ali RAR, et al.

Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2018 Jan;15(1):39-49.
PMID: 29018271 DOI: 10.1038/nrgastro.2017.136

A number of environmental factors have been associated with the development of IBD. Alteration of the gut microbiota, or dysbiosis, is closely linked to initiation or progression of IBD, but whether dysbiosis is a primary or secondary event is unclear. Nevertheless, early-life events such as birth, breastfeeding and exposure to antibiotics, as well as later childhood events, are considered potential risk factors for IBD. Air pollution, a consequence of the progressive contamination of the environment by countless compounds, is another factor associated with IBD, as particulate matter or other components can alter the host's mucosal defences and trigger immune responses. Hypoxia associated with high altitude is also a factor under investigation as a potential new trigger of IBD flares. A key issue is how to translate environmental factors into mechanisms of IBD, and systems biology is increasingly recognized as a strategic tool to unravel the molecular alterations leading to IBD. Environmental factors add a substantial level of complexity to the understanding of IBD pathogenesis but also promote the fundamental notion that complex diseases such as IBD require complex therapies that go well beyond the current single-agent treatment approach. This Review describes the current conceptualization, evidence, progress and direction surrounding the association of environmental factors with IBD.
Development of the global inflammatory bowel disease visualization of epidemiology studies in the 21st century (GIVES-21)

Mak JWY, Sun Y, Limsrivilai J, Abdullah M, Kaibullayeva J, Balderramo D, et al.

BMC Med Res Methodol, 2023 May 25;23(1):129.
PMID: 37231405 DOI: 10.1186/s12874-023-01944-2

BACKGROUND: There is a rapid increase in the incidence of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) in newly industrialized countries, yet epidemiological data is incomplete. We herein report the methodology adopted to study the incidence of IBD in newly industrialized countries and to evaluate the effect of environmental factors including diet on IBD development.
METHODS: Global IBD Visualization of Epidemiology Studies in the 21st Century (GIVES-21) is a population-based cohort of newly diagnosed persons with Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis in Asia, Africa, and Latin America to be followed prospectively for 12 months. New cases were ascertained from multiple sources and were entered into a secured online system. Cases were confirmed using standard diagnostic criteria. In addition, endoscopy, pathology and pharmacy records from each local site were searched to ensure completeness of case capture. Validated environmental and dietary questionnaires were used to determine exposure in incident cases prior to diagnosis.
RESULTS: Through November 2022, 106 hospitals from 24 regions (16 Asia; 6 Latin America; 2 Africa) have joined the GIVES-21 Consortium. To date, over 290 incident cases have been reported. All patients have demographic data, clinical disease characteristics, and disease course data including healthcare utilization, medication history and environmental and dietary exposures data collected. We have established a comprehensive platform and infrastructure required to examine disease incidence, risk factors and disease course of IBD in the real-world setting.
CONCLUSIONS: The GIVES-21 consortium offers a unique opportunity to investigate the epidemiology of IBD and explores new clinical research questions on the association between environmental and dietary factors and IBD development in newly industrialized countries.
Fulltext Global Hospitalization Trends for Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis in the 21st Century: A Systematic Review With Temporal Analyses

Buie MJ, Quan J, Windsor JW, Coward S, Hansen TM, King JA, et al.

Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2023 Aug;21(9):2211-2221.
PMID: 35863682 DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2022.06.030

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The evolving epidemiologic patterns of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) throughout the world, in conjunction with advances in therapeutic treatments, may influence hospitalization rates of IBD. We performed a systematic review with temporal analysis of hospitalization rates for IBD across the world in the 21st century.
METHODS: We systematically reviewed Medline and Embase for population-based studies reporting hospitalization rates for IBD, Crohn's disease (CD), or ulcerative colitis (UC) in the 21st century. Log-linear models were used to calculate the average annual percentage change (AAPC) with associated 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). Random-effects meta-analysis pooled country-level AAPCs. Data were stratified by the epidemiologic stage of a region: compounding prevalence (stage 3) in North America, Western Europe, and Oceania vs acceleration of incidence (stage 2) in Asia, Eastern Europe, and Latin America vs emergence (stage 1) in developing countries.
RESULTS: Hospitalization rates for a primary diagnosis of IBD were stable in countries in stage 3 (AAPC, -0.13%; 95% CI, -0.72 to 0.97), CD (AAPC, 0.20%; 95% CI, -1.78 to 2.17), and UC (AAPC, 0.02%; 95% CI, -0.91 to 0.94). In contrast, hospitalization rates for a primary diagnosis were increasing in countries in stage 2 for IBD (AAPC, 4.44%; 95% CI, 2.75 to 6.14), CD (AAPC, 8.34%; 95% CI, 4.38 to 12.29), and UC (AAPC, 3.90; 95% CI, 1.29 to 6.52). No population-based studies were available for developing regions in stage 1 (emergence).
CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalization rates for IBD are stabilizing in countries in stage 3, whereas newly industrialized countries in stage 2 have rapidly increasing hospitalization rates, contributing to an increasing burden on global health care systems.
Comparison of the accuracy of the 7-item HADS Depression subscale and 14-item total HADS for screening for major depression: A systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis

Wu Y, Levis B, Daray FM, Ioannidis JPA, Patten SB, Cuijpers P, et al.

Psychol Assess, 2023 Feb;35(2):95-114.
PMID: 36689386 DOI: 10.1037/pas0001181

The seven-item Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale Depression subscale (HADS-D) and the total score of the 14-item HADS (HADS-T) are both used for major depression screening. Compared to the HADS-D, the HADS-T includes anxiety items and requires more time to complete. We compared the screening accuracy of the HADS-D and HADS-T for major depression detection. We conducted an individual participant data meta-analysis and fit bivariate random effects models to assess diagnostic accuracy among participants with both HADS-D and HADS-T scores. We identified optimal cutoffs, estimated sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals, and compared screening accuracy across paired cutoffs via two-stage and individual-level models. We used a 0.05 equivalence margin to assess equivalency in sensitivity and specificity. 20,700 participants (2,285 major depression cases) from 98 studies were included. Cutoffs of ≥7 for the HADS-D (sensitivity 0.79 [0.75, 0.83], specificity 0.78 [0.75, 0.80]) and ≥15 for the HADS-T (sensitivity 0.79 [0.76, 0.82], specificity 0.81 [0.78, 0.83]) minimized the distance to the top-left corner of the receiver operating characteristic curve. Across all sets of paired cutoffs evaluated, differences of sensitivity between HADS-T and HADS-D ranged from -0.05 to 0.01 (0.00 at paired optimal cutoffs), and differences of specificity were within 0.03 for all cutoffs (0.02-0.03). The pattern was similar among outpatients, although the HADS-T was slightly (not nonequivalently) more specific among inpatients. The accuracy of HADS-T was equivalent to the HADS-D for detecting major depression. In most settings, the shorter HADS-D would be preferred. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
Data-Driven Cutoff Selection for the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 Depression Screening Tool

Levis B, Bhandari PM, Neupane D, Fan S, Sun Y, He C, et al.

JAMA Netw Open, 2024 Nov 04;7(11):e2429630.
PMID: 39576645 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.29630

IMPORTANCE: Test accuracy studies often use small datasets to simultaneously select an optimal cutoff score that maximizes test accuracy and generate accuracy estimates.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the degree to which using data-driven methods to simultaneously select an optimal Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) cutoff score and estimate accuracy yields (1) optimal cutoff scores that differ from the population-level optimal cutoff score and (2) biased accuracy estimates.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This study used cross-sectional data from an existing individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA) database on PHQ-9 screening accuracy to represent a hypothetical population. Studies in the IPDMA database compared participant PHQ-9 scores with a major depression classification. From the IPDMA population, 1000 studies of 100, 200, 500, and 1000 participants each were resampled.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: For the full IPDMA population and each simulated study, an optimal cutoff score was selected by maximizing the Youden index. Accuracy estimates for optimal cutoff scores in simulated studies were compared with accuracy in the full population.
RESULTS: The IPDMA database included 100 primary studies with 44 503 participants (4541 [10%] cases of major depression). The population-level optimal cutoff score was 8 or higher. Optimal cutoff scores in simulated studies ranged from 2 or higher to 21 or higher in samples of 100 participants and 5 or higher to 11 or higher in samples of 1000 participants. The percentage of simulated studies that identified the true optimal cutoff score of 8 or higher was 17% for samples of 100 participants and 33% for samples of 1000 participants. Compared with estimates for a cutoff score of 8 or higher in the population, sensitivity was overestimated by 6.4 (95% CI, 5.7-7.1) percentage points in samples of 100 participants, 4.9 (95% CI, 4.3-5.5) percentage points in samples of 200 participants, 2.2 (95% CI, 1.8-2.6) percentage points in samples of 500 participants, and 1.8 (95% CI, 1.5-2.1) percentage points in samples of 1000 participants. Specificity was within 1 percentage point across sample sizes.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study of cross-sectional data found that optimal cutoff scores and accuracy estimates differed substantially from population values when data-driven methods were used to simultaneously identify an optimal cutoff score and estimate accuracy. Users of diagnostic accuracy evidence should evaluate studies of accuracy with caution and ensure that cutoff score recommendations are based on adequately powered research or well-conducted meta-analyses.